You are on page 1of 14

U.S.

Department of Justice
FY 2008 PERFORMANCE BUDGET

CONGRESSIONAL SUBMISSION

COMMUNITY RELATIONS SERVICE


Table of Contents

Page No.

I. Overview .............................................................................................................. 3

II. Summary of Program Changes....................................................................... 5

III. Appropriations Language and Analysis of Appropriations Language……. 6

IV. Decision Unit Justification............................................................................... 7

A. Community Relations Service


1. Program Description.................................................................................. 7
2. Performance Tables.................................................................................... 10
3. Performance, Resources, and Strategies.................................................... 11

V. Program Increases by Item.................................................................................

N/A

VI. Program Offsets by Item..................................................................................

N/A

VII. Exhibits............................................................................................................

A. Organizational Chart......................................................................................
B. Summary of Requirements ...........................................................................
C. Program Increases by Decision Unit..............................................................
E. Resources by DOJ Strategic Goal/Objective.................................................
F. Justification for Base Adjustments.................................................................
G. Crosswalk of 2006 Availability......................................................................
H. Crosswalk of 2007 Availability......................................................................
I. Summary of Reimbursable Resources...........................................................
J. Detail of Permanent Positions by Category...................................................
K. Financial Analysis of Program Increases/Offsets..........................................
L. Summary of Requirements by Grade.............................................................
M. Summary of Requirements by Object Class..................................................
N. Status of Congressionally Requested Studies, Reports, and Evaluations......

2
I. Overview for Community Relations Service

In FY 2008, the Community Relations Service (CRS) requests 56 permanent positions, (which
includes 1 attorney) 56 FTE, and $9,794,000. No additional programs or enhancements are
requested for FY 2008. CRS’ information technology (IT) program will continue operating with
one (1) FTP/FTE, with no anticipated IT enhancements in FY 2008. “Beginning in FY 2007,
electronic copies of the Department of Justice’s congressional budget justifications and Capitol
Asset Plan and Business Case exhibits can be viewed or downloaded from the Internet using the
Internet address: http://www.usdoj.gov/jmd/2008justification/.”

CRS was created under Title X of the historic Civil Rights Act of 1964 (42 U.S.C. §2000g et
seq.) signed into law by President Lyndon B. Johnson on July 2, 1964. Title X of the 1964 law
mandated CRS’ creation and its duties and responsibilities.

CRS, an office within the U.S. Department of Justice, is headquartered in Washington, D.C., and
is a single decision unit that plays a significant role in DOJ’s Strategic Goal #3, Conflict
Resolution and Violence Prevention Activities. Serving as the Department’s “peacemaker” for
community conflicts and tensions arising from discriminatory practices, CRS is a specialized
mediation service available to state, local and federal officials and communities in resolving and
preventing racial and ethnic conflict, violence, and civil disorder. CRS has 10 Regional offices
and 4 field offices at the following locations: Boston; New York; Philadelphia; Chicago (field
office at Detroit); Kansas City; Denver; Los Angeles (field office at San Francisco); Dallas (field
office at Houston); Atlanta (field office at Miami); and, Seattle.

CRS possesses a remarkably unique attribute in being the only federal component dedicated to
assisting state and local units of government, both private and public organizations, and
community groups with preventing/resolving racial and ethnic tensions, incidents, and civil
disorders, and in restoring racial stability and accord. CRS is able to address perception of
racism, which sometimes may prove to be as upsetting to communities as actual racism.
However, CRS does not have law enforcement authority and does not investigate or prosecute
cases or assign blame or fault. In contrast, CRS enables communities to develop, as well as,
implement their own solutions to reducing racial/ethnic tensions. CRS facilitates the
development of viable, mutual understandings and agreements as alternatives to coercion or
litigation.

The CRS budget consists of operating expenses which includes but is not limited to, payroll for
its 56 permanent positions; travel expenses to enable the CRS conciliation professionals to be
physically available to the nation’s tate and local units of government, private and public
organizations, and community groups; as well as funding for normal operations, i.e.,
communications, equipment, supplies, etc. By applying common inflation rate methodologies,
and the evaluation of historical trend analysis methodologies, the FY 08 budget cost of
$9,794,000 is required for CRS to support the Department in maintaining conflict resolution and
violence prevention activities. Under recent budget constraints, the CRS program has not
requested any increase in FTE or program enhancements.

No programs within CRS have been subject to the Program Assessment Rating Tool (PART)
review.

3
Performance Challenges

Although CRS’ mission and strategic objectives will not change drastically in FY 08, complex
and forever changing challenges still remain; thus impacting CRS’ progress toward achievement
of its goals. CRS must continue to enhance its daily operations based on Departmental
dynamics, technological developments, national security, and recruitment of quality applicants.
These factors pose challenges that demand attention, and impact the practices of CRS.

Outside of CRS’ operational intricacies, the challenges we face on a national level will continue
to change and develop. CRS will continue to emphasize racial tensions involving ethnic
communities who are suffering as a result of the war on terrorism. Fear related to terrorism often
turns into prejudicial hate against persons of a different heritage, national origin, or race. CRS
will continue to focus on possible racial conflicts in the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina. In
addition, CRS is confronted with the constant impact of stringent economic times, which limits
local and federal resources and increases pressure and tension among diverse racial and ethnic
groups. In effect, CRS has pioneered highly successful conflict resolution and violence
prevention strategies to deal with the constantly changing demographic shifts that create cultural,
language, and historical clashes throughout the U.S. cities and increasingly in border states.

CRS External Challenges


External challenges to the work of CRS include follow-up assistance to communities in defusing
and resolving racial conflicts due to Hurricane Katrina. In the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina,
CRS will continue to resolve race-related conflicts in areas such as housing, education,
community relations, and the administration of justice. In addition, CRS is continuing to address
the global immigration and cultural changes that affect this country since September 11, 2001
CRS’ nationwide conflict resolution and violence prevention activity now deals with a more
complex set of dynamics. These dynamics stem from the growth of intolerance and distrust
directed against Arab American, Muslim, and Sikh (AMS) people and those people perceived to
be Arab American, Muslims, or Sikh. Community peace and stability have both weakened,
because of the significant demographic changes in the United States based on an influx of new
racial and ethnic immigrant groups. These ever expanding factors increase the need to be
calculated into the host of vulnerabilities community’s face that give rise to an increase in hate
incidents, increase in cultural and communication barriers, and racial friction as competition for
jobs and services. All these issues impact community peace and stability.

Although counter terrorism efforts have sought to build confidence and trust in the Government,
it has also created a constant reminder of pending risks and dangers associated with terrorist
actions. The war in Iraq, economic downturn, fewer state and local resources, and the arrival of
new immigrants combined, create conditions for racial and ethnic discord and tension, and result
in an increase of demands for CRS services. CRS also continues to face the challenge of having
to constantly reintroduce its services to community and local government leaderships, because
these are often short-termed, limited tenure positions. Police community relations surrounding
excessive use of force and the possibility of racial violence related to these incidents in minority
communities consume more than half of CRS’ work. CRS is also called upon to address racial
harassment and violence in elementary and secondary schools and on college and university
campuses, as well as hate incidents involving desecration of houses of worship.

4
CRS Internal Challenges

CRS faces continuing internal challenges as it must monitor the Nation for jurisdictional cases,
and do its best to respond to each with limited resources. In FY 2006, CRS responded to nearly
600 community incidents and conflicts arising from issues of race, color or national origin. CRS
currently operates with a field staff of 39 employees for 50 states and 6 territories. Regional
staff workers are restricted in the number of cases that CRS can handle by time, budget, and
location. CRS will continue to focus its internal efforts on building new staff capacities through
succession planning, regular, sustained, high-quality all-staff in-service training, and
field/headquarter detailees to build mediation and management capacities of new hires. The
majority of current vacancies are funded at the GS-09 level, which will inherently present an
expected learning curve, but will also allow for CRS to reach a 56 person team and stay within
its budgeted FTE. High quality standards for leadership, in-service training, state mediation
certification, standardized measurable work plans, and improved tracking and coaching systems
on service delivery and case reporting is a part of the CRS work ethic.

II. Summary of Program Changes

The Fiscal 2008 CRS budget request does not consist of any increases/offsets to its program.
This section is not applicable to CRS.

5
III. Appropriations Language and Analysis of Appropriations Language

Appropriations Language

For necessary expenses of the COMMUNITY RELATIONS SERVICE [$9,794,000] $9,613,000:


Provided, that notwithstanding any other provision of law, upon a determination by the Attorney
General that emergent circumstances require additional funding for conflict resolution and
violence prevention activities of the Community Relations Service, the Attorney General may
transfer such amounts to the Community Relations Service, from available appropriations for the
current fiscal year for the Department of Justice, as may be necessary to respond to such
circumstances: Provided further, that any transfer pursuant to the previous proviso shall be
treated as a reprogramming under section 605 of this Act and shall not be available for
obligation or expenditure except in compliance with the procedures set forth in that section.
(Department of Justice Appropriations Act)

Analysis of Appropriations Language

The FY 2008 President’s Budget Uses the FY 2007 President’s Budget language as a base so all
language is presented as new.

6
IV. Decision Unit Justification

A. Community Relations Service

Community Relations Service TOTAL Perm. FTE Amount


Pos.
2006 Enacted with Rescissions 56 48 $9,536,000
2006 Supplementals 0 0 $215,000
2006 Enacted w/ Rescissions and Supplements 0 0 $9,751,000
2007 President’s Budget 56 56 $9,613,000
Adjustments to Base and Technical Adjustments 0 0 $181,000
2008 Current Services 56 56 $9,794,000
2008 Program Increases 0 0 $0
2008 Request 56 56 $9,794,000
Total Change 2007-2008 0 0 $181,000

Community Relations Service


Information Technology Breakout (of Perm.
Decision Unit Total) Pos. FTE Amount
2006 Enacted with Rescissions 1 1 $795,000
2006 Supplementals 1 1 0
2006 Enacted w/ Rescissions and Supplements 0 0 $795,000
2007 President’s Budget 1 1 $821,000
Adjustments to Base and Technical Adjustments 0 0 $0
2008 Current Services 1 1 $847,000
2008 Program Increases 0 0 $0
2008 Request 1 1 $847,000
Total Change 2007-2008 0 0 $26,000

1. Program Description

CRS’ program contributes to the Department’s Strategic Goal 3: Prevent and Reduce Crime
and Violence by Assisting State, Tribal, Local, and Community-based Programs. Within
this Goal, CRS specifically addresses the Department’s Strategic Objective 3.3 – Uphold the
rights of and improve the services to America’s crime victims and promote resolution of racial
tension.

CRS has implemented several strategies, which are intended to effectively address the issues of
discriminatory practices based on race, color, or national origin, which impair the rights of
people. Some strategies are:

• Law Enforcement Mediation (LEM) Program is a two day (16 hours) program
designed to equip the attending officers with basic knowledge of mediation and conflict
resolution skills as they apply directly to law enforcement. Our program focuses on the

7
officer's need to respond to any given conflict or dispute (in particular, race and ethnic
based issues) in a minimum of time, with a maximum of effectiveness. The traditional
method of policing in response to many disturbance calls where a solution is dictated
meant callbacks to the same disturbance. The CRS LEM is a mediation and conflict
resolution approach that offers opportunity for more lasting solutions based on the
disputants’ involvement in resolving their issues of conflict. The process involves
empowering the community to resolve an instant dispute with assistance, but also instills
skills and knowledge with the citizens to resolve other disputes without the necessity of a
police presence. The course focuses on particular issues in minority communities.

• Anti-Racial Profiling Program is a program that reviews the history and concept of
profiling by police in the addressing criminal activity. The program focuses on the
differences and complexities of using race as a factor in police investigations and the
impact of racial profiling on minorities. Through a series of videotape and role playing
exercises, law enforcement and community members learn how to avoid the use of racial
profiling as well as how to defuse such allegations whenever they arise.

• Arab-Muslim, Sikh (AMS) Cultural Awareness Program builds a cadre of


community-based free trainers capable of delivering law enforcement training across the
country to heighten awareness, increase knowledge and develop skills to effectively
communicate about Arab, Muslim, and Sikh cultures in order to reduce tensions and
strengthen unity in communities. These trainers work side-by-side with CRS staff and
follow standardized and approved CRS curriculum.

• City - Problem Identification and Resolution of Issues Together (City-SPIRIT)


Program is a recently developed program that resolves race related conflicts within cities
and communities in a collaborative effort. Following years of field testing, CRS assists
city and other local forms of government with existing racial conflicts in a community-
wide problem solving process to better understand and to address racial tensions and
conflicts that may exist in the schools, work places, businesses and neighborhoods.
Examples of this work are evident in Pittsburg, Kansas and Monroe, Louisiana.

CRS introduced and updated several management systems to more effectively address racial
tension and violence in major cities. CRS intensified its emphasis on staff development and
training of staff on the fundamental skills of conflict resolution. CRS holds national staff
training sessions to enhance and refresh contemporary conflict resolution strategies and
mediation skills. CRS instituted an internal skills certification process for fundamental tools that
are used in conflict resolution cases. CRS continues to strengthen its emphasis on local capacity
building by having Conciliators focus on the implementation of collaborative partnerships and
other mechanisms for strategically empowering and sustaining peaceful communities.

The services of CRS are tracked by a case management database. Quality assurance is measured
by a weekly headquarters review of every new case in the CRS system. Headquarters then
provides weekly operational written and constructive feedback to all 10 Regional Directors.
Regions are directed to hold bi-monthly staff meetings to review casework feedback. Progress
on casework has been significant from a technical and quality perspective.

8
The following charts depict CRS performance and workload. These case numbers show marked
change in activities as a result of a policy change, which occurred at the beginning of Fiscal Year
2005. The policy change required CRS to focus more heavily on crisis resolution and mediation
versus outreach and has impacted each area of the CRS case activity.

9
PERFORMANCE AND RESOURCES TABLE

Decision Unit: Conflict Resolution and Violence Prevention - Program Operations

DOJ Strategic Goal/Objective: III. Assist State, Local and Tribal Efforts to Prevent and Reduce Crime and Violence
Requested
Final Targe t Actual Es tim ate Changes
WORKLOAD/ RESOURCES (Total)
Current Services
FY 2006 FY 2006 FY 2007 Adjustm ents and FY FY 2008 Request
2008 Program Changes

Workload

Total Costs and FTE


(reim bursable FTE are included, but FTE $000 FTE $000 FTE $000 FTE $000 FTE $000
reim bursable costs are bracketed and not
included in the total)
56 $9,536 49 $9,431 56 $9,613 0 $181 56 $9,794
TYPE/ Current Services
STRATEGIC PERFORMANCE FY 2006 FY 2006 FY 2007 Adjustm ents and FY FY 2008 Request
OBJECTIVE 2008 Program Changes

FTE $000 FTE $000 FTE $000 FTE $000 FTE $000
Program
Activity Conflict Resolution and Violence
Prevention
[ ] 56 $9,536 56 $9,613 0 $181 56 $9,794
Cases w here CRS services w ill help
Perform ance
resolve community racial violence and
Me asure 590 584 637 22 659
conflict
Cases w here CRS services w ill prevent
Efficiency
potential community racial violence and
Me asure
conflict 113 180 112 4 116

Communities w ith Improved Conflict


OUTCOME
Resolution Capacity
703 764 759 27 786

Data Definition, Validation, Verification, and Lim itations: CRS collects and maintains data in a case management system, CRSIS, w hich establishes standard criteria
for recording and classifying casew ork. CRS Regional Directors review and approve all case inf ormation entered into CRSIS by conciliators; the data is review ed and
verified by analysts and managers at CRS Headquarters. CRSIS is w eb-based and allow s for easier access to data. CRS continues to update the system to better manage
data requirements and improve the accuracy of the data collection.

10
PERFORMANCE MEASURE TABLE

Decision Unit: Conflict Resolution and Violence Prevention - Program Operations

FY 2000 FY 2001 FY 2002 FY 2003 FY 2004 FY 2005 FY 2006 FY 2007 FY 2008


Perform ance Report and Perform ance Plan Targets

Actual Actual Actual Actual Actual Target Actual Actual Target Target
Perform ance Cases w here CRS services w ill help N/A N/A N/A 705 494 520 546 584 637 659
Measure resolve community racial violence or conflict
Cases w here CRS services w ill prevent
Perform ance
potential community racial violence or N/A N/A N/A 471 94 100 105 180 112 116
Measure
conflict

OUTCOME
Communities w ith Improved Conf lict N/A N/A N/A 1176 588 620 651 764 759 786
Measure
Resolution Capacity

N/A = Data unavailable

11
2. Performance, Resources, and Strategies

a. Performance Plan and Report for Outcomes

The Conflict Resolution and Violence Prevention Activities program contributes to the
Department’s Strategic Goal #3: Prevent and Reduce Crime and Violence by Assisting State,
Tribal, Local and Community-based Programs. Within this Goal, the program specifically
addresses the Department’s Strategic Objective: 3.3 – Uphold the rights of and improve the
services to America’s crime victims and promote resolution of racial tension.

Each region, composed of 3-4 Conciliators and one Regional Director, conducts an appraisal of
racial tension in collaboration with state and local officials to determine projects that require
immediate attention and demonstrate the greatest need for inclusion in a work plan for resolving
racial conflict or violence. Annually, the work plan addresses those communities within each
region that require conflict resolution services on an annual basis. Approximately 75% of the
region’s workload is direct crisis response services, 5% administrative, and 20% comprehensive
projects that address the Annual Appraisal of Racial Tension (AART). Most CRS Conciliators
have a common set of programmatic tools, such as mediation, conflict resolution, technical
assistance, and specific conflict-related training programs that respond to racial tension and
violence.

b. Strategies to Accomplish Outcomes

CRS strategies include the Law Enforcement Mediation (LEM) and Anti-Racial Profiling
Programs; Arab, Muslim, and Sikh (AMS) Cultural Awareness Program; and, the City Problem
Identification and Resolution of Issues Together (City SPIRIT) program. [See Section III, 1.
Program Description for detail of CRS strategy programs.]

These strategies are specifically designed to assist states, local communities, and tribal
governments in resolving racial violence and conflict. CRS has been working collaboratively
with four major customer groups: (1) investigative and law enforcement agencies; (2) courts,
state, local and tribal governments, and federal agencies, including U.S. Attorneys, FBI, CRT,
ENRD, CRM, HUD, DOI, DOT/TSA, DOED, and domestic immigration officials; (3) schools,
colleges, and universities; and (4) community groups and other organizations to assist and
resolve racial violence and conflict. CRS develops strategies that focus on bringing together the
energy of community leaders, organizations, and citizens to work towards crime-prevention and
providing safe neighborhoods and communities for all Americans through cooperation and
coordination with other Department of Justice components. CRS provides comprehensive
services that empower communities to help themselves and maximizes the federal investment at
the local level.

In order to fulfill the strategic goals of the agency, the management team will continue to stress
contemporary mediation skills development, increase accountability on implementation of
policies focusing on community conflict driven cases, overall performance work plans, and
reaffirm a merit award system for outstanding work. CRS has implemented new systems and
will continue to improve upon existing systems in order to meet its goals. CRS’ success can be

12
evaluated on how well its strategies address progress made in reaching the Department’s Conflict
Resolution and Violence Prevention Activities goal to which it contributes, in addition to keeping
the peace in cities throughout the country when events occur that could essentially turn into
major riots, violence and property damage.

c. Results of Program Assessment Rating Tool (PART) Reviews

No programs in the CRS budget account have been subject to a PART Review independently.

13
VII. EXHIBITS

14